SIYARAM Vs. PRAKASHCHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs was admitted for final hearing on 05/02/2020 by formulating the following substantial question of law :-

(2.) Plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction stating inter alia that the suit land mentioned in paragraph 1 of the plaint was given to their father Sadhuram by the then Malguzar of village Mopka namely Balgangadhar Rao Tilak and since then, their father was in possession of the suit land and after his death, plaintiffs have been in continuous possession of the suit land by cultivating and growing vegetables as the suit land is located near the Arpa river and the defendants were never in possession of the suit land. It was further pleaded that in the year 1967, defendants' father namely Dhanjee Bhai filed a suit against plaintiffs' father being C.S. No. 6A/1967 which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 16/04/1968. Then, the defendants' father also filed an application for recovery of possession of the suit land before the Additional Tahsildar, Bilaspur under Section 250 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 which was dismissed on 04/06/1997, but the defendants got their names recorded in the revenue records with the collusion of the revenue officer. As such, they are entitled for decree for declaration of title and permanent injunction as they have perfected their title over the suit land by way of adverse possession.

(3.) Resisting the suit, defendants filed their written statement stating inter alia that their father had purchased the suit land from Hussain Bi, Julfikar Hussain, Gangadhar Rao, Manohar Rao and Padmakar Rao by separate registered sale deeds and defendants' father Dhanjee Bhai had filed a suit against plaintiffs' father Sadhuram who vacated the suit premises during the pendency of the suit before the trial Court, therefore, defendants' father stopped appearing in the suit and it was thus dismissed by the trial Court for want of prosecution and since then, defendants' father and thereafter the present defendants are in possession of the suit land.